League Policies
What you can expect from experienced policy debaters
- Expect Solid Argumentation. Debaters should explain the logical connections between arguments and how those arguments support their position.
- Expect Support for Claims. Debaters should support claims they make with examples, analogies, their own analysis, or cited sources (known as evidence).
- Expect Clash: Debaters should engage with their opponent’s most important arguments, and explain why their own arguments are superior. While they may legitimately decide to agree with their opponent on some issues, they should also identify areas of disagreement and defend their own positions regarding those points.
What you should NOT expect of policy debaters
- Do not expect a perfect plan from Affirmative Teams: No policy is perfect, so the Affirmative Team should not be held to an unreasonably high standard for what a proposed policy change will achieve.
- Do not expect perfect preparation from Negative Teams: The range of policy-change proposals that teams can introduce when they are assigned as the Affirmative Team in a round can be staggering. It is entirely possible for the Negative Team to hear a policy proposal idea for the first time during the first Affirmative speech. This does not remove the burden for the Negative Team to convince the judge that the plan should not be adopted, but it may mean that the Negative Team must rely on probing questions, logical assessments, appeals to common sense, and generic arguments that pertain to evaluating any policy change.
- Do not expect answers to every argument: With limited time, debaters must often choose which arguments to prioritize, so ignoring or “dropping” a lesser argument that is outweighed by a more important one should not necessarily be considered a losing move.